Forums → WEPR → [necro] For all the Israel haters...
| 181 | 45158 |
I dare you to claim that this is not a clear example of U.N. bias against Israel. This sort of stuff has been seen time after time after time in events like the Goldstone Report, the Zionism equals Racism vote, and the Durban Conferences. The U.N. needs to seriously reexamine what it stands for, because it has now become a sound-off board for those who wish to condemn Israel at every opportunity.
Discuss whether or not you think that the U.N. is biased against Israel.
- 181 Replies
Yes, the poor Jewish settlers who are moving to the kibbutzim already built previous to the Holocaust are such a threat, considering that they will mainly be living in swampland and desert.
There was a documentary made a few years ago where a man was interviewing children in Israel and the territories of Palestine and I saw firsthand what was going on over there. Yes, it is wrong for people to strap bombs on their chests and expect change by murdering innocent civilians, but isn't it just as bad that the Israeli military is riding their tanks and APCs into small Palestinian villages, executing controlled detonations on the underside of cars of people who aren't even proven to be terrorists, and destroying people's homes to build walls to shut them off of the world? I didn't see anything from the point of Jewish children though...because the lead journalist was shot by an Israeli soldier before he had a chance to give the children some say. And the worst part is that this man was not released for his "accident", he was promoted!!!
Captain hindsight does not come to the rescue but make you look like a barbaric invader again. After the war, the stricture were highlighted and brought to the worlds attention; I highly doubt there would have been another mass massacre by the allies. It might be heartless for me to claim so, but two wrongs don't make a right, and the Jews no matter how bullied they were, had no right to do that in turn to the Palestinians who had done nothing to aid the Holocaust.
Further more, if you're going to suggest land grabs and violence are the rules people play by, why are you bemoaning what Hamas is doing now, to get land for their people via any means necessary be aide for two generations, they have been sidelined and alienated? Talk about hypocrisy before shouting out gleefully for Captain Hindsight. More like Captain Misight.
Because for two generations*
The Holocaust was brought to light*
executing controlled detonations on the underside of cars of people who aren't even proven to be terrorists
If you're talking about the assassination of Iranian scientists, there is no proof that it was Israel.
Further more, if you're going to suggest land grabs and violence are the rules people play by, why are you bemoaning what Hamas is doing now, to get land for their people via any means necessary be aide for two generations, they have been sidelined and alienated? Talk about hypocrisy before shouting out gleefully for Captain Hindsight. More like Captain Misight.
No, the reason that I am bemoaning Hamas launching rockets into Israel is because that is today. Today, we have these rules. However, back then, we didn't exactly, especially in the aftermath of WWII. I am applying today's laws and logic to today's events, and 1945 laws and logic to 1945 events. You are basically trying to condemn Israel ex post facto for something that would most certainly be illegal today, however was not back then. Just as you would not hold a computer from the 1970s to the standards of a MacBook, you should not hold events and thinking of the late '40s to the standards of today.
I highly doubt there would have been another mass massacre by the allies. It might be heartless for me to claim so, but two wrongs don't make a right, and the Jews no matter how bullied they were, had no right to do that in turn to the Palestinians who had done nothing to aid the Holocaust.
Because being an ardent supporter of the Nazis is not aiding the Holocaust in any book. Now, your chief argument will probably be "it's just one man." However, he was the religious leader of the Sunni population, and they accepted his authority. By not speaking out against the Holocaust, the civilian members of the population aided the aggressor. Therefore, it can be said that the Palestinians indirectly aided the Holocaust, and in fact supported it by blocking Jewish refugees from entering the land.
but isn't it just as bad that the Israeli military is riding their tanks and APCs into small Palestinian villages
No sadder than Hamas using children as shields, and no sadder than Hamas launching rockets into civilian towns.
There was a documentary made a few years ago where a man was interviewing children in Israel and the territories of Palestine and I saw firsthand what was going on over there.
Name or a link please.
I didn't see anything from the point of Jewish children though...because the lead journalist was shot by an Israeli soldier before he had a chance to give the children some say. And the worst part is that this man was not released for his "accident", he was promoted!!!
Again, link.
As far as I know, legality of migration has always been enforced by the British Mandate and is not a recent phenomenon. Based on that, Jewish immigration is still illegal, making a state based on Jewish majorities is illegal. So yes, I still am condemning the Partition.
The allies didn't speak out against the Holocaust. Therefor they supported it and caused it. Poor logic. Throw in the fact that almost everyone, including most Germans were not aware of the final solution until post WWII, I suppose everyone is guilty then? Daft.
Canada also refused to allow Jewish refugees in in the 1930s, so they aided the Holocaust too? I also guess that Britain caused te Holocaust because they set the quotas for Jewish immigration too? Really?
Furthermore
The allies didn't speak out against the Holocaust. Therefor they supported it and caused it.
Because they were not aware of it. However, they actively fought against it, so your argument doesn't hold water.
Throw in the fact that almost everyone, including most Germans were not aware of the final solution until post WWII, I suppose everyone is guilty then? Daft.
Again, most Germans were not aware of it. I do not hold the German people at fault, only their government at the current time. Just like the Palestinians. Now, when people say they hate America. Do they hate the average Joe? Or do they hate the government and their policies?
Canada also refused to allow Jewish refugees in in the 1930s, so they aided the Holocaust too? I also guess that Britain caused te Holocaust because they set the quotas for Jewish immigration too? Really?
Britain in part contributed toward the Holocaust by not allowing all the Jewish refugees into Israel, and sent them back home. Canada also. Same with America and Cuba and South American countries. Almost every country in the world contributed to the Holocaust, either by not accepting fleeing Jews, or by ignoring the fact that it was occurring. You know one of the only countries that tried to aid the Jews? Japan.
Furthermore
Yes?
Right....so on one hand the allies didn't know about the Holocaust, so they are not to blame, yet they are blamed for not letting the Jews in? Select a view and hold on to it, not make two different stands on the issue.
Foisting the blame of the Holocaust on a country which did not know about it is just hysterical finger pointing that goes against logic and rationality. Furthermore, given that the Germans didn't know about the holocaust, what makes you think the Palestinian people knew about it and are hence to blame? Weak, tenacious and invisible leaps of faith with no evidence. Given that the Palestinian people and even disputably their Mufti didn't know about it, how can you blame them, even indirectly?
I suppose that if that's the case, youre guilty of the Rwandan genocide since you didn't know about it?
No, Mussolini protected the Jews until the later half, an so did Franco.
And no the canadians and the allies fought because they were threatened by the Axis, and not because they wanted to liberate the Jews. Wrong reason for a worn argument on trying to absolve blame if there was even blame.
****, I had a whole post typed out and then my computer crashed...
Right....so on one hand the allies didn't know about the Holocaust, so they are not to blame, yet they are blamed for not letting the Jews in? Select a view and hold on to it, not make two different stands on the issue.
I am saying that because they had no knowledge of it, than they cannot be blamed. However, because of the fact that they refused ships of refugees, than they invariably, however unintentionally, aided Hitler. What I proposed was not an ultimatum statement, so your argument is a false dichotomy.
Foisting the blame of the Holocaust on a country which did not know about it is just hysterical finger pointing that goes against logic and rationality. Furthermore, given that the Germans didn't know about the holocaust, what makes you think the Palestinian people knew about it and are hence to blame? Weak, tenacious and invisible leaps of faith with no evidence. Given that the Palestinian people and even disputably their Mufti didn't know about it, how can you blame them, even indirectly?
Do you even read what I am writing? I never said that the Germans were to blame, simply the government! I never said the Palestinian people were to blame, simply their religious government! Also, the Grand Mufti toured Auschwitz...sounds like a nice guy, doesn't he! Plus he demanded that Jewish refugees to Israel be denied entry. So he obviously had no idea about what was going on...
I suppose that if that's the case, youre guilty of the Rwandan genocide since you didn't know about it?
Again, I was not aware of it, nor was I born. Try again.
And no the canadians and the allies fought because they were threatened by the Axis, and not because they wanted to liberate the Jews.
Again, by fighting against the source of the Holocaust, they fight against the Holocaust. Just like if there is an infestation of ants in your house, and I destroy the ant hill, I am by extent fighting against the ants in your house.
Unintentionally aiding means you can't put the blame on them.
Whether the Grand Mufti toured Austwitz is disupted; furthermore Eichmann himself has denied any visits. So yeah. Speaks for itself.
You said that the Palestinians indirecty aided and supported the Holocaust earlier. I did read what you posted, did you? Instead of trying to wiggle out of your previous claim that was clearly blaming the Palestinians?
Sub you out for your young age and put in very single person alive at that point. That's still your logic.
No, I won't Bother to argue via that analogy because an analogy is always limited. They fought against Nazi Germany as a threat and not because they wanted to aid the Jews simply because they didn't know about it. That's not the same thing and is completely off track.
Also to quote you "The civilian members of the population aided the aggressor".....
Who do you think youre kidding when you're just trying to cover your tracks now by stating it's just the government?
Unintentionally aiding means you can't put the blame on them.
So if you have an expensive vase, and I accidentally bump the table it's on, than it's not my fault?
Whether the Grand Mufti toured Austwitz is disupted; furthermore Eichmann himself has denied any visits. So yeah. Speaks for itself.
Eichmann was a known liar on the stand. Also, the story of the Mufti touring Auschwitz was collaborated by two other witnesses.
Sub you out for your young age and put in very single person alive at that point. That's still your logic.
No, it's not. Quote me directly where I said that if you don't know about something, than it is your fault.
They fought against Nazi Germany as a threat and not because they wanted to aid the Jews simply because they didn't know about it. That's not the same thing and is completely off track.
It doesn't matter whether or not they wanted to help the Jews! In fact it's completely irrelevant! The point is that they fought against those that were killing the Jews, so they helped liberate them.
Also to quote you "The civilian members of the population aided the aggressor".....
Who do you think youre kidding when you're just trying to cover your tracks now by stating it's just the government?
First of all, people make mistakes while they are typing, and some messages don't come as clear across as when they think of them in their mind. Second of all, it was almost 11:30. I had just gotten back from a marathon Seder. Needless to say, I was exhausted. I'm sure that you've said stupid things under the stupor of sleep, so do not blame me for a mistake when I was clearly influenced by other factors.
Now, if you'll allow me (which I doubt you will), to correct my statement...
"By not speaking out against the Holocaust, the civilian members of the population aided the aggressor."
Instead of this, I meant, "The members of neutral/aggressive nations who had knowledge about the Holocaust aided the aggressor."
So if you have an expensive vase, and I accidentally bump the table it's on, than it's not my fault?
Analogies again? No it isn't your fault. If you want a better analogy, it's like blindfolding me, causing me to hit the vase, since I didn't know it was there, just like the Allies didn't know about the Holocaust, or the blind person knowing about the vase.
Eichmann was a known liar on the stand. Also, the story of the Mufti touring Auschwitz was collaborated by two other witnesses.
You've been known to state wrong facts, should I take that as a logical conclusion that you're wrong too? Furthermore, Kastner, who made the claim, was also known to be a liar at the Nuremburg trials.
Instead of this, I meant, "The members of neutral/aggressive nations who had knowledge about the Holocaust aided the aggressor."
That's still the same meaning. It's still blaming members, i.e civilians of neutral and aggressive nations for the Holocaust when they didn't a) start it, b) expand it to other nations when the Reich marched on. They had no knowledge of the massacres, and it is unfair to finger them for it. If boatloads of immigrants turned up at your doorstep abruptly, most people and governments would have rejected them. As can be seen by the immigration debates today. I don't need a long explanation on why you mistype, if you want to withdraw statements, do so at your own discretion.
It doesn't matter whether or not they wanted to help the Jews! In fact it's completely irrelevant! The point is that they fought against those that were killing the Jews, so they helped liberate them.
It's completely irrelevant that the Allies who didn't know about the conflict should be absolved of blame, as your Canadian examples state, and those who didn't actively fight and accidentally and coincidentally liberated the Jews be blamed. They simply stumbled into the camps, surprised, and liberated them. Even if there was blame on nations who didn't intervene and rejected refugees, which I reject, this does not absolve them of the blame, since they just so happened to liberate them.
Britain in part contributed toward the Holocaust by not allowing all the Jewish refugees into Israel, and sent them back home. Canada also. Same with America and Cuba and South American countries. Almost every country in the world contributed to the Holocaust, either by not accepting fleeing Jews, or by ignoring the fact that it was occurring.
No, it's not. Quote me directly where I said that if you don't know about something, than it is your fault.
Given that we've established that almost no one knew about the Holocaust, you're in effect saying that these countries are to be blamed, directly or indirectly even if they didn't know.
Seems to me like you're getting bogged down in details you two, anyway, to answer the OP myself:
I don't think the U.N is biased against Israel per say, I think it is biased against other situations that need attention, whatever your view on Israels' right to existence/expansion, you can't deny that there are some serious problems in the West bank and Gaza that need addressing.
In some ways I think they may be biased, although I ma not NECESSARILY against that, I mean if you believe someone cannot have an un-biased view on something and cannot be a fair judge you must be biased against them, and not entrust them with any responsibility/power in a situation they are too involved in to be objective about.
Just as, (I mean no offense) I don't truly believe Zakyman is able to be truly objective about the Israel situation, as it is the state of you religion, you religion obviously being a big thing in your life. I don't blame you, I would feel the same put in the same situation, and it doesn't make your right to an opinion any less valid.
Good to get my teeth into a proper debate again after so long....
Thread is locked!